Compassionate Professional Care

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated Good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

People told us they were treated with dignity and spoken to in a respectful way. One relative told us, “They [staff] close the door. [Family member] has got a blind in their room and they always close it. If they need anything they’ll knock the door. From what I’ve seen they respect their dignity and everything.” Another said, “I was with [family member] this morning when the carers came. They come in smiling with lots of ‘hellos’ and the overall communication between us all is really good and friendly.”

Staff had received dignity and respect training. Our conversations with managers and staff assured us they treated people and their relatives with the utmost respect.

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics. A relative said, “I think they [staff and managers] should get some recognition on how they treat people. It feels like they are an extension to our own family.”

People’s care plans provided staff with important information about their history, and preferences, including information about protected characteristics.

Discussions with staff demonstrated they respected and supported people with their individual routines. One staff member said, “Every person I support is different and they each have their specific ways they like their care to be arranged and carried out. Getting to know people well is important so we can care for them as an individual.”

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. One relative said, “My [family member] is supported in making their own choices.”

People were supported to maintain relationships with friends and relatives. The provider promoted and recognised the benefits positive relationships have upon people to support their ongoing emotional wellbeing and their role in supporting this. The provider’s ethos was one of continual and ongoing dialogue with people and their families. People and relatives continually referred to the positive and engaging style of management in place, and how this had forged a trusting relationship between them.

People’s preferences and routines in relation to personal care was recorded to support staff to meet their individual preferences. Staff we spoke with were able to tell us about people in depth and how they chose to lead their lives, and the importance in their role to enable people to achieve this. One person’s feedback referenced how ‘they loved it when my hands and nails are soaked as part of my care’. They described their carer as a warm and caring person who they had developed a good understanding and relationship with.

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. They were alert to any change in people’s emotional needs or physical presentation and knew the importance of raising and addressing these sensitively and promptly. One staff member said, “Because I know the people I support well, I can detect quickly if something doesn’t look or feel quite right.” One relative told us, “We have already discussed what will happen if [family member] needs change and how care will be adapted.”

Care calls were almost always undertaken as planned and the same staff deployed. This provided people with continuity of care. People and relatives confirmed they had a schedule of forthcoming visits and if any changes were made even if this was on the day they were informed.

Managers promptly contacted, and worked well with external professionals, when people’s needs changed. They had systems in place for when people’s care arrangements may need reviewing outside a scheduled review. People and relatives told us it was easy to discuss any concern or worry they had with staff and managers.

The registered manager cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care. Staff praised the managements approach and support afforded to them. One said, “They [managers] are always there for us and on hand all the time if we need them and we feel we are cared for too.” They raised no concerns about staffing levels or the time they were afforded to travel between care calls. They also confirmed they worked alongside equally well-trained colleagues who had the right skills and experience to support each other so they could undertake their role safely and in line with planned care.

Time afforded to care calls enabled all tasks to be completed and unrushed. It was reported widely by staff, people and relatives that care staff had time within their calls to talk with people which eliminated the risk of a task focussed approach to care. One staff member said, “ If a call is going to run over the planned time, we call the on-call manager, and they sort it which stops other people being delayed with their call.”

Discussions with staff and the registered manager demonstrated a positive culture was in place and the importance of it promoted. Observations of interactions between managers and staff whilst undertaking the assessment confirmed this.